This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

Comments by jbyrd

Go to: Myth-Making: Say It Often, People Will Believe

jbyrd's Avatar Jump to comment 9 by jbyrd

This is the very reason why science is being attacked in America....

Organizations, like Faux News, just hammers the same old rumors over and over, and before you know it, people start believing it. Despite how non-credible the organization is... Climate change, Atheism, Global Warming, Abortion, Science Research, etc...

One of my favorite, "rumors", that the obviously non-credible Faux News organization likes to throw out is, FOX NEWS, FAIR AND BALANCED....

When questioned on that I believe the response given was, There are so many other organizations out here that are mid to left, that we HAVE to be Right wing nuts to balance it out.

Sat, 03 Sep 2011 23:04:23 UTC | #867028

Go to: Calling all foxhole atheists – fill out THIS version of the Spiritual Fitness test.

jbyrd's Avatar Jump to comment 6 by jbyrd

A lot of the questions seemed so cryptic that it was hard to decipher what the question was asking. How can you put together any sort of reasonable statistical data from questions that have variable meanings?

Fri, 02 Sep 2011 03:37:10 UTC | #866541

Go to: Republicans Against Science

jbyrd's Avatar Jump to comment 63 by jbyrd

Comment 60 by i_am_user :

I'm surprised the article didn't mention the huge irony in accusing climate scientists of lying so they can get money...you mean, pocket change compared to what the oil companies are getting away with? Last time I checked, scientists aren't exactly living large.

I wonder why Republican goes hand in hand with religion, greediness, (willful) ignorance and corporate corruption...shouldn't the religious have a 'higher standard' of moral? Or because the deeply religious tend to be unintelligent, to which they are exploited? It's a mystery to me!

Republicans have reformed themselves as the anti-elitist party. Which would be great, except they also redefined the word elitist. The elitist are no longer the wealthy or the super wealthy, but the intelligent. And that makes someone who devotes their entire life to attaining knowledge, aka scientists, enemy #1.

Thu, 01 Sep 2011 19:20:23 UTC | #866424

Go to: New study disputes notion that men are better at spatial thinking than women

jbyrd's Avatar Jump to comment 9 by jbyrd

I agree with the criticism within the article, "Others however are still not convinced; some suggest that assembling a wooden puzzle doesn’t truly demonstrate spatial abilities at all since it’s actually just a two dimensional puzzle."

Thu, 01 Sep 2011 17:25:10 UTC | #866398

Go to: Why the laws of physics make anthropogenic climate change undeniable

jbyrd's Avatar Jump to comment 49 by jbyrd

The specifics of climate change are very complicated that have to be simulated through a supercomputer. However, the choices are very simple.
Do something about it, or dont...thats it.

We already know that CO2 causes global warming and thus climate change, and we know that humans put an enormous amount of it into the atmosphere. And we know that we have to do something... These things are not debated among credible climatologist.

It is true, we dont know EVERYTHING, about anything, and there is some doubts about a few specifics regarding climate change, but to use such things to propagate inaction is careless at best. So yes, I call these people deniers, because that is exactly what they are. They deny the truth of reality,the results of climate change are all around us, and something has to be done. Inaction is not a logical, nor viable choice.

To insinuate that "denier" is an insult is akin to demanding "respect" for religion.

Wed, 31 Aug 2011 21:11:23 UTC | #866039

Go to: Why the laws of physics make anthropogenic climate change undeniable

jbyrd's Avatar Jump to comment 47 by jbyrd

Comment 46 by NealOKelly :

Comment 45 by jbyrd

That is merely political propaganda to prevent action....its sickening tbh.

What's sickening? The fact that - in the real world - things can be complicated?

The greed that propagates such lies, the fact that people are gullible enough to fall for such things, and my own inability to change things.

Another poster peg'd it perfectly, its the same as the transition from Creationism to ID.

PS: At least you didnt deny it was merely political propaganda....its a start.

Wed, 31 Aug 2011 20:06:26 UTC | #865998

Go to: Why the laws of physics make anthropogenic climate change undeniable

jbyrd's Avatar Jump to comment 45 by jbyrd

Comment 43 by NealOKelly :

Comment 42 by jbyrd

Calling them deniers is quite appropriate, since they are in fact denying a mountain of evidence as well as the facts of the situation. It is not an insult to call a spade a spade.

You make out like there are only 2 possible views about ACC! Either you believe in it, or you don't.

That's nonsense! On might:

  • not believe the climate is changing at all

  • believe that it is changing, but human influence has had no effect

  • believe that humans have had an effect, but not a big one

  • believe that the majority of global warming is down to man

  • believe [as Jos appears to] that 100% of global warming is not only down to man, but specifically down to CO2 emissions

  • accept that global warmining is man made, but that believe the consequences might not be that bad

  • accept that global warmining is man made and believe the consequences will be catastrophic

  • believe the only way to deal with the consequences is to cut CO2 emissions,

  • believe that reductions in CO2 emissions will take decades to show any effect and that we better off concentrating on adapting developing technology to cope with a changed climate. Whilst 98% of climate scientist may support the proposition that climate change is man-made, it's absolutely not true to say they argree on all of the above.

  • That's not a made up controversy. It simply isn't. Climate change goes beyond science. It's ecomonics, it's politics. It most certainly not black and white!

    That is merely political propaganda to prevent action....its sickening tbh.

    Wed, 31 Aug 2011 19:58:09 UTC | #865992

    Go to: Why the laws of physics make anthropogenic climate change undeniable

    jbyrd's Avatar Jump to comment 42 by jbyrd

    Comment 31 by NealOKelly :

    I’m with Rolan on this one: the term “denier” is unhelpful and more than a little offensive. AGW is not a black and white issue. Most sceptics do not dispute:

    a) That we are currently experience a period of warming b) That the physics predicts that an increase in atmospheric CO2 will result in warming c) That the activities of man have resulted in increases in atmospheric CO2

    What most sceptics question is whether or not man-made CO2 emissions are the principle agent for warning. That’s doesn’t strike me as being a particularly irrational question, especially given the complexity of the systems we are trying to model.

    Others question the rationale of the economic case if large-scale CO2 reductions, arguing the economic harm of CO2 reductions would actually be worse that the economic harm of climate change. [Note, this particular brand of denial doesn’t necessarily even involve questioning the scientific consensus, just the economics.]

    If you ask me, it’s not the “deniers” that are acting irrationally here.

    Neal (No relevant qualifications)

    Calling them deniers is quite appropriate, since they are in fact denying a mountain of evidence as well as the facts of the situation. It is not an insult to call a spade a spade.

    It is actually a rather poor question indeed...because in the end, the answer has no bearing on the immediate future. Knowing a,b,&c it is quite clear that we need to do something about c, whether it is the most prominent cause or not. (And all current data shows it is)

    The economic impact will be worse than the climate change....what a joke. Green technology has a huge opportunity to stimulate the economy, and save billions down the road. And even if it didnt, what good is paper when the earth is inhabitable?

    Ohh and in the US, This year’s record-breaking tornadoes, floods, droughts and wildfires will cost the country tens of billions of dollars in economic losses...current conservative estimates are at over 30 billion.

    Wed, 31 Aug 2011 19:22:20 UTC | #865975

    Go to: 'Black Death' bacteria likely extinct, study finds

    jbyrd's Avatar Jump to comment 17 by jbyrd

    This article must be false....I just saw a patient diagnosed with the bubonic plague on House last week!!! =)

    Wed, 31 Aug 2011 17:27:26 UTC | #865946

    Go to: Mormon Glenn Beck: Hurricane Irene and East Coast earthquake a ‘blessing’ from God

    jbyrd's Avatar Jump to comment 86 by jbyrd

    So we have regressed to the ol' Natural Disasters are a warning from god claim... And here I thought we had made some progress since the ancient greeks.

    Comment 64 by Nordic11 :

    @stevehill

    You cannot actually be sane and truly believe in virgin birth, resurrection, Jesus's miracles (raising the dead, feeding the 5,000 etc), eternal life, hell and so on. And if you don't really believe in (all of) those things, you can't be a Christian.

    I see. So the 2 billion Christians (and presumably the 3 billion others who adhere to other religions) on the planet are insane, but the few million nonbelievers are the only ones in control of their mental facilities (because they refuse to believe in anything outside of the material world). That’s quite a grand statement (and to be honest quite disappointing).

    On a personal level, I don’t feel like an insane person. I have had two professions for more than two decades, am raising a family, enjoying a successful marriage, creating a reserve of financial resources for my family, enjoying excellent relationships with my neighbors and colleagues, have maintained close personal friendships for decades, and have successfully coped with the threat of a terminal disease for six years. Funny, I’m not thinking this is the profile of an insane person. Perhaps insanity needs to be redefined.

    Insane might be too strong of a word, but I would definitely say they are mentally disturbed. The mental disturbance is very similar to an adult who was abused as a child.

    Wed, 31 Aug 2011 17:16:58 UTC | #865944

    Go to: Supercomputers Allow First Detailed Milky Way Simulation

    jbyrd's Avatar Jump to comment 26 by jbyrd

    Comment 8 by Rothron the Wise :

    I don't think you're right about that. My computer came with a built-in screensaver where it's like all the stars are flying towards you. I just put it on and I definitely counted more than 2000 of them.

    Are you joking? 2000 might be a little low, but you can't compare the simple starfield screensaver to something that involves simulating gravity.

    In a gravity simulation complexity scales as the square of the number of bodies in the simulation, because the gravity of every body needs to interact with the gravity of every other body.

    This means that the difference in complexity between a 10 body simulation and a 10000 body simulation is 6 orders of magnitude.

    Humor is often wasted here...

    PS: I thought it was funny.

    Wed, 31 Aug 2011 17:05:36 UTC | #865940

    Go to: Supercomputers Allow First Detailed Milky Way Simulation

    jbyrd's Avatar Jump to comment 4 by jbyrd

    Comment 3 by Schrodinger's Cat :

    According to Moore's law, a home PC should have enough power to create the same simulation ( in 8 months ) in just 20 years or so......which will be cool, as at the moment it's hard to find any home PC galaxy simulation that has more than about 2000 stars.

    Unfortunately, the trend of Moore's law should end about 2015 to 2020, as the transistors will eventually reach the limits of miniaturization at atomic levels:

    Wed, 31 Aug 2011 02:53:10 UTC | #865753

    Go to: Evangelicals question the existence of Adam and Eve

    jbyrd's Avatar Jump to comment 43 by jbyrd

    Comment 42 by Mr DArcy :

    Why all the cynicism guys? Certain Christian theologians, no doubt some of them respected, are questioning whether Adam and Eve ever existed! I'm not sure what the Islamic or Jewish scholars think, but it seems these Christian scholars are in the avant guarde of the "progressive" religious movement. You know the movement that leads believers even more into the impenetrable swamps of and foggy land of the unknowable.

    (I was never much good at poetry, but I hope my meaning was clear).

    Replacing one delusion with another does not constitute progress in my opinion. Even if they dismissed this one story all together, it would have very little impact on their perception of reality.

    Tue, 30 Aug 2011 23:08:10 UTC | #865700

    Go to: Republicans Against Science

    jbyrd's Avatar Jump to comment 54 by jbyrd

    Comment 43 by Crazycharlie :

    Agree with KenChimp @30.

    The party with the likes of Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt has been gone for many decades. Take, for instance, a man like Teddy Roosevelt. It's been documented that he read several thousand books and could read several books a day in multiple languages no less. He wrote 18 books. He loved poetry and could recite, at length, poems from memory. Now contrast TR with George W. Bush, Sara Palin, Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry and Mitt Romney!

    Hilarious!

    The Republican Party's future is questionable. It's dominated by godbots. They look for anti-intellectual presidential candidates knowing the voters of this anti-intellectual country will respond.

    I don't know if it is questionable or not, to be honest ... The Republicans are good at one thing, getting elected, and like you said the religious anti-intellectual niche has been a huge success for them.

    Comment 48 by KJinAsia :

    The part that so many criticisms of the Republicans miss or understate, is that the party has become the Roger Ailes party. Perry's "platform" is tailor made to be in line with Fox News propaganda. Ailes/Fox sets the conservative issues and will decide the candidate.

    Ailes will probably choose Perry over Bachmann because he's male and doesn't have the liability of a repressed gay husband. Perry will happily do Ailes' bidding. Perry is anti-science because Ailes is anti-science.

    It may sound conspiratorial, but Ailes runs Fox like a cult. He manages the messages that spew from his minions on a daily basis. Fox is essentially the deluded and selfish opinions of ONE MAN. People need to understand the destructive power this one man has.

    Sorry, but who is Ailies?

    [Text-speak converted to English by moderator]

    Tue, 30 Aug 2011 17:43:59 UTC | #865621

    Go to: Republicans Against Science

    jbyrd's Avatar Jump to comment 31 by jbyrd

    Great article.

    The Republican party has become a cancer within the US.....its sad really, and I am not even a democrat. They peddle fear, ignorance, and lies to get in office, primarily through media (tyvm Faux News). And when they get into office, they only have 2 priorities, make money for the wealthy and to stay in office.

    But basking in ignorance is their primary method to getting elected...somehow the elitist are no longer the wealthy, but the intelligent.

    Mon, 29 Aug 2011 20:13:34 UTC | #865289

    Go to: Evangelicals question the existence of Adam and Eve

    jbyrd's Avatar Jump to comment 1 by jbyrd

    evangelical intelligentsia

    Isnt that an oxymoron?

    Mon, 29 Aug 2011 20:07:33 UTC | #865282

    Go to: US cigarette makers sue over graphic warning labels - freedom of speech?

    jbyrd's Avatar Jump to comment 41 by jbyrd

    Comment 3 by Scruddy Bleensaver :

    Comment 1 by epeeist :

    Can a corporation have a right to free speech? Shouldn't this be reserved for real as opposed to pretend people?

    In 2011 America, corporations are people according to the supreme court.

    Actually they are far superior to people.

    Back on topic though, I doubt the corp can win...

    Forcing comparison to put hazard/health warnings on dangerous materials is not breaking their 1st amendment rights.

    Fri, 26 Aug 2011 00:23:55 UTC | #864317

    Go to: Indoctrination of children - how to escape?

    jbyrd's Avatar Jump to comment 1 by jbyrd

    Get the hell out of that country.....problem solved.

    Fri, 26 Aug 2011 00:04:17 UTC | #864314

    Go to: Support petition stop state schools using religion to discriminate against children

    jbyrd's Avatar Jump to comment 36 by jbyrd

    Comment 30 by aldous :

    Schooling in the UK is compulsory and that schooling should not include the teaching of lies. Comment 27 by Woodworm

    There are differences of opinon about what is true. On grounds of freedom of religion, there must be an opportunity for religious organizations to fund their own schools.

    Why? Religion and Education need not have anything to do with one another.

    Thu, 25 Aug 2011 23:43:12 UTC | #864309

    Go to: Church Billboard Actually Contains an Atheistic Message

    jbyrd's Avatar Jump to comment 21 by jbyrd

    I guess all those years of reading cryptic text has warped their brains...and the only response they can muster is also cryptic.

    PS: Funny true story, but I saw a similar church ad a few years back, except the topic was porn.

    In giant bold letters it said,

    PORN, What is wrong with it?

    followed by small letters, churches name

    Thu, 25 Aug 2011 02:50:10 UTC | #863991

    Go to: Secular humanists on the real planet of the apes

    jbyrd's Avatar Jump to comment 49 by jbyrd

    Comment Removed by Author

    Thu, 25 Aug 2011 00:33:11 UTC | #863944

    Go to: Secular humanists on the real planet of the apes

    jbyrd's Avatar Jump to comment 48 by jbyrd

    Comment Removed by Author

    Thu, 25 Aug 2011 00:32:53 UTC | #863943

    Go to: Secular humanists on the real planet of the apes

    jbyrd's Avatar Jump to comment 47 by jbyrd

    Comment 46 by jbyrd :

    Comment 44 by jbyrd :

    Comment 29 by matthew_1 :

    There seems to be a misunderstanding of science on all sides here. Science is about creating theories that fit facts, not about 'belief'. The theory of evolution appears to be consistent with observations made in genetics, and from fossils.

    However, being science means that one has to accept that a new and different theory could be proposed that fits these observations even better (cf. Karl Popper).

    Once you raise evolution to a 'belief' that cannot be argued against you are making a religion out of it. Science doesn't give you truth, it provides models that explain, and hopefully predict, the world. Neither Newtonian or relativistic physics are 'true' in the sense normally used when one believes in something, but they have been pretty good at explaining a lot of behaivours (but not all). Evolution is no different from that.

    So you are saying the law of gravity is a religion....interesting.

    Comment 36 by matthew_1 :

    then the statement by Gov Perry quoted in the article

    On the same day, campaigning in New Hampshire, Texas Gov. Rick Perry described evolution as "a theory that's out there" and one that's "got some gaps in it."

    is an accurate statement, from a scientific point of view. It is definitely "out there" in the sense that it is well known. And, as with all theories, there are "gaps". He doesn't propose an alternative theory, at least none is quoted in the article.

    On the other hand, Huntsman and Wilson "believe" in evolution as if it a religion. It would seem that Perry has made the more rational statement, which is contrary to the sentiment of the article.

    It is accurate, but at the same obviously misleading. It insinuates that there are more than one theory out there...of course there is not.

    And any new information gathered would just be added onto the current theory of evolution....The theory of evolution has so much backing that is damn near law status at this point. You also seem to be insinuating that we will some day throw it out and start with a new theory. That is obviously not gonna happen!

    Thu, 25 Aug 2011 00:32:33 UTC | #863942

    Go to: Secular humanists on the real planet of the apes

    jbyrd's Avatar Jump to comment 46 by jbyrd

    Comment Removed by Author

    Thu, 25 Aug 2011 00:32:10 UTC | #863941

    Go to: Secular humanists on the real planet of the apes

    jbyrd's Avatar Jump to comment 44 by jbyrd

    Comment 29 by matthew_1 :

    There seems to be a misunderstanding of science on all sides here. Science is about creating theories that fit facts, not about 'belief'. The theory of evolution appears to be consistent with observations made in genetics, and from fossils.

    However, being science means that one has to accept that a new and different theory could be proposed that fits these observations even better (cf. Karl Popper).

    Once you raise evolution to a 'belief' that cannot be argued against you are making a religion out of it. Science doesn't give you truth, it provides models that explain, and hopefully predict, the world. Neither Newtonian or relativistic physics are 'true' in the sense normally used when one believes in something, but they have been pretty good at explaining a lot of behaivours (but not all). Evolution is no different from that.

    So you are saying the law of gravity is a religion....interesting.

    Thu, 25 Aug 2011 00:15:40 UTC | #863934

    Go to: Arguably: Essays by Christopher Hitchens

    jbyrd's Avatar Jump to comment 29 by jbyrd

    Unregulated capitalism is akin to anarchy, and eventually all the wealth is controlled by a very small percentage of the population. Of course this outcome remains the same even when capitalism is regulated, just at a slightly slower pace.

    Wed, 24 Aug 2011 03:41:48 UTC | #863621

    Go to: Richard Dawkins at the University of Maryland

    jbyrd's Avatar Jump to comment 9 by jbyrd

    1

    Wed, 24 Aug 2011 01:48:28 UTC | #863584

    Go to: Attention Governor Perry: Evolution is a fact

    jbyrd's Avatar Jump to comment 66 by jbyrd

    Comment 21 by Steve Zara :

    It's a great article, but I think it misses out one more possibility about the mindset of Republican candidates. Maybe some are liars. They believe in evolution, but dare not say so because it would threaten their support.

    How have we come to this? How have we got to the state where a once-great party in the USA seems determined to be led and run by fools, dunces and liars?

    Calling them liars is FAR too generous....they are a scourge.

    Wed, 24 Aug 2011 00:58:59 UTC | #863573

    Go to: Important Harvard scientists attack kin selection

    jbyrd's Avatar Jump to comment 27 by jbyrd

    Just goes to show you how drastically overrated the ivy league schools really are.

    Little more than daddy day care with a free ride for the wealthy.

    Sun, 03 Apr 2011 06:11:36 UTC | #611148

    Go to: Do we have the right to burn the Koran?

    jbyrd's Avatar Jump to comment 177 by jbyrd

    Comment 167 by Peter Grant :

    Fuck Moses, Jesus and Mohammed and fuck anyone who thinks that me saying this gives them or anyone else the right to kill people, or that it makes me responsible for their actions in any way shape or form.

    I think this guy wins the debate.

    Sat, 02 Apr 2011 20:43:55 UTC | #610959